STEEL:

The fact that I was saying stop whining and picking apart every aspect of this development does not suggest that I do not care about the east side of Buffalo. On the contrary, this project is a great thing for the area, and long overdue.

The fact that people are complaining about where the garages are being built or how wide alleys are is ridiculous. THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH THIS DEVELOPMENT.

To every other nitpicker:

I don't see others stepping up to the plate to complete a project like this. If it's your own money, you can put the garages where you want. Grow up people.

New urbanists do not put garages way out in front of houses. It doesn't take a genius to recess a garage, I don't understand the problem... an extra $2,000 in paving perhaps? Not a lot to spend when it makes all the difference between a disirable, walkable neighborhood and a neighborhood that puts cars, not people, first. Though the top image is ok, the bottom two are the same recycled suburban car-oriented garbage that people already complain about in the city. It's a major diasappointment, and I can't fathom BRO accepting this second rate design in the Elmwood Village, why would you laud it here? If we keep expecting less, that's exactly what we'll keep getting.

new homes, and investment in a community that is mostly poor and mostly minority and mostly segregated actually gives hope to those inhabitants. it does show them that they are worth investment, and they have WORTH as individuals. in our society, that equals hope. at least that is the theory. Rental vouchers do nothing but perpetuate the same tired nieghborhoods, with the same poor individuals who qualify, that happen to be segregated to the same part of town.

WCP needs to go back and read his planning books cause this is far from a new urbanists community. where is the mixed use? this is just a redevelopment with a trendy name.

on the other hand as far as BMHA is concerned, the practised model of warhousing individuals of certain class is an abomination, and is a cancer on our society. if this redevelopment for infill was targeted from seneca to genesee that stretched all the way to bailey ave, then it would be a postive project. the scope is too limited, and too pedestrian to affect any real change.

It's called "snout house" (garage out front) and it's a mix of modern building codes and lot sizes that usually lead to this. In this area, you can no longer build an attached garage set back deeper than the front of the house unless the garage is facing out to the side rather than the front, a tricky thing to do on a small lot.

Every project of the BMHA is a drain on the city, no matter how they look. "Public" housing has done nothing except accelerate the decline of Buffalo for the past 70 years, and it will continue to do so for as long as it exists.

Then the lot sizes should be bigger. Nope, can't do that, big lots are a suburban trait. Put the garage sideways and, nope, I see that in the suburbs too. If the worst thing about this project is the garage thing, then I think we are not doing too bad with this project. I think it will be an improvement.

Does anyone remember Cabrini Green in Chicago?

It was considered no-mans land in Chicago where people dared not go because it was so riddled with drugs, crime, alcohol, absent fathers, single mothers, abandoned and unsupervised kids, gangs, shootings, poverty, etc. Kids couldnt walk to school even if they managed to rise above the contempt for education and adults couldnt walk to work if they could rise above the contempt for employment.

Chicago tore them all down. All the projects! All the towers! What did they do with them? They replaced them with rental vouchers that allow the poor to live anywhere there are jobs and good schools and the offered incentives to developers to include a portion of their development to be low income (usually 10%-20%) . Of course, the developer could be include retail, office or light industrial and get the same incentives if they employed low income individuals.

It changes the entire dynamic of the situation. It makes programs for the poor partners with developers, local business and local property owners instead of competitors.

The result was a boom. -Properties that were to be demolished found tenants -Properties that were to be demolished found owners -Properties that were in dis-repair were fixed up -once blighted neighborhoods received the support for private sector development that catered to mixed incomes and multi-uses. -the poor were disbursed and the cycle of poverty was broken because the social norm had changed.

If this can happen in other cities, then it can happen in Buffalo. Does Brown have the courage to do something bold for Buffalo! Like Williams, we have to ask about Browns priorities! Does Brown care more about poor minorities (including blacks) or does he care more about patronage.

I agree- a little too much garage face is better than the buildings currently sitting on that stretch of land, and at least it isn't track housing that looks like glorified double-wide trailers.

Garages are a little pointless anyway, since most people who have them don't use them for parking cars. The cars are always in the driveway in front of the garage and the garage is full of junk or a lawn table that could be on the lawn instead.

We should expect the best quality. I don't think this is whining. This is what good citizens should be doing.

This site is supposed to be a forum for comments. What purpose does it serve just to say that "something is better than nothing".

That's what I call short sighted.

Dont worry their low income housing and that means their going to be built with substandard materials, poor craftsmanship and probably owned by high risk groups likely to default or not maintain their home. Which means that these homes arent going to last 100 years....they will last the typical 30-50 years that municipal housing projects typically last before being replaced.

The homes are nice for low low income housing but ugly pieces of manure for any other neighborhood. Atleast the departments of Urban Renewal and the BMHA are getting the message and abandoning projects that warehouse the poor for something closer to mixed income and multi-use projects (though I dont see any retail components mixed in). They are still a far cry from replacing their municipal housing stock with rental vouchers that would entice owners to buy and rent much of our presently abandoned or poorly maintained properties and save them demolition.

Buffalo has surplus housing! We dont need the BMHA or their projects! The BMHA and the Department of Urban Renewal is a corrupt abomination, a pestilence, nusiance that Buffalo can ill afford and should be dismantled infavor or rental vouchers and mixed income developments. I cringe that the thought of either of them contributing to Buffalo after demolishing much of Buffalo's eastside and Niagara Falls (neither of which have been rebuilt). I wish people would recognize beaurocratic bloodsucking leaches when they see them!

Though, if you have read my earlier posts...I have been vindicated and proved correct. The Main-Jefferson Corridor which includes City Honors (Masten-Fosdyk HS), Masten Armory, Masten Park, City Stadium, the Life Sciences COE, etc....is the next section of Buffalo to gentrify. I just thought because of the major urban assets the signature and quality greater and I thought that Grant Street would have been further along in gentrifying before the Jefferson Corridor (but few seem to be concerning themselves with the Richardson or Buffalo State which have major impacts on Grant)

Municipal Housing is a corrupt abomination. Its stalinesque in its communist version of warehousing the poor where anti-social behavior becomes the norm (crime, gangs, drugs, alcohol, gambling, abuse, etc with a healthy dose of single mothers, absent fathers, anti-work and anti-education). If there is any education at all its studying the government benefit programs. I took a family member in for food stamps and the person at the next table was coaching a 16 year old about what to say and do to quality!

Sorry but count me in with DoctorK, sbrof, joe d. and others who want the BMHA abandoned and the money replaced with rental vouchers, subsidies to maintain our housing stock rather than demolish and subsidies for mixed income / multi-use development.

We need to stop warehousing the poor and integrate them into the civic norms or our city where education, responsibility and hard work are the norm. In other words, the poor need to have housing close to jobs!

These homes are located nowhere near employers, these homes are within a single income range and there is no retail component for kids to get jobs and be taught responsibility. All which perpetuates their present situation instead of helping.

Alleys are integral to NU development, so parking is accessed in a less onspicuous manner. Unfortunately, it's ingrained in Buffalo's collective mindset - alleys are bad. Buffalo has very few alleys; those that exist are quite narrow compared to those in Chicago, Denver and other "alley cities," and they are usually very poorly maintained.

Alleys also function best in a street grid with short blocks, where the alleys will also be shorter, thus making them defensible and reducing the likelihood of traffic conflicts. Buffalo's urban blocks are usually very long; Chicago and Denver have eight blocks to the mile, while in Buffalo four to six blocks per mile is more common.

Snow removal in alleys can be an issue; where do the piles go? In Colorado, alleys in NU projects often have about 6' of landscaping on either side. Not only does it increase the turning radius for garage access, but it also provides snow storage.

Still, three blocks and old-timey architecture does not equal "New Urbanism". What's proposed is better than the suburban-style infill development the East Side normally sees, though.

I've rented to 'Section 8' people, too - and the program seemed fine to me. Very little paperwork, rent was on time, tenants & I were happy. The inspections were not onerous, and actually pointed out a couple of items I wouldn't have known about and was happy to fix.

An expansion of the Section 8 program & gradual dissolution of BMHA would help the City. Sell the buildings and land, stop using tax dollars to compete with those trying to sell or rent out property.

Many neighborhoods around projects, including this one at Jefferson & William, have been largely abandoned. A quick comparison between old & new aerial view and maps will confirm this. Obviously, having a project in the vicinity isn't a good thing. They aren't investing in a community, they are building (rebuilding, now) their own enclave while the surrounding community dies.

Looking at the site plan: http://www.buffalorising.com/city/archives/upload/2006/06/priceplan.jpg It appears that most of the garages for the new build units are properly located off of the vehicular alley versus on the main streets of Jefferson Ave. & Mortimer St.. The houses will be built right up to the sidewalk except for what appears to be lots that aren't deep enough for a rear alley (possibly backing existing housing where no alley could be accomidated). The new, infill 3 story retail buildings on William St. also look to be built up to the sidewalk as well and their multi story nature would lead me to believe they won't be typical "sea of parking" suburban type retail. I really like the plan and the neighborhood will be better because of it.

The concepts of new urbanism will be of great use to this area and this project. Focusing on pedestrian oriented design will help this neighborhood. While the overall idea is wonderful, and alley loaded garages certainly are a new urbanist concept, having some garages sticking out in front of the majority of the rest of the house (perspective 3) is FAR from the ideals of new urbanism. I would like to see more... the other items that help define a pedestrian oriented design are just as/ or more improtant than putting victorian detailing on a home

Rue -

Thanks for posting the site plan. It does look clear that the garages are off of back alleys and not Jefferson/William. It looks pretty good. I wonder what extent the rehabbing of existing apartments and elderly housing will be. I hope they pay as close attention to that as they do the new builds.

L - I'm skeptical that going to a 100% rental voucher system would be in the best interest of our city, and our city's low income residents. Instead of spurring development and the kind of private investment we want, I think instead we'd see a dramatic increase in slumlordism.

Well put CK

It never ceases to amaze me the pettiness and shortsightedness of some of the people that post on this site. This is a great development in a section of the city that is desperate for attention. Who cares where the garages are located or if the alley isn't a "Chicago style" alley. This area is severely dilapidated. New housing and development will only help the area reinvent itself and promote future development.

And assuming that the quality will be poor is equally shortsighted. I have no problem with critical comments. This is how we learn about all the pros and cons of a project. But I will not condemn what I feel is an honest effort to improve a neighborhood unless I see something to justify the condemnation. That's for the screamers. I also expect the best quality. First sign of nonsense, I will join in.

CK,

we should always care about the quality of our built environment especially in places like Buffalo's east side were few people do care.

public housing as it has been in the past was a grave mistake, clearly said and ruined and continue to ruins many neighborhoods. The consolodation of poor people into an area was one of the worst ideas in the name for the public good.

As for the new developments and people who say we are nit picking should realize this is not the first new type of public housing that has been built. the HOPE VI project on the lower west side, is still going on replacing some of the worst city public housing with essentially suburban streets.

The quality unfortunatly is sub par unless there is VERY STRICT supervision by the city. The contractors see it as free money so they don't put the same effort into their work as if it is was private person. There is no one to bitch them out when they do something dumb on these projects.

The quality of the materials are also typically sub par because being public money, politicians want to get as many as possible housign units out of their money. That is not essentially the problem but they fail to realize that once they are no longer in office all these units are going to start falling apart.

I would rather have fewer structures that can be a part of buffalo's future and not a band aid for its past problems.

This is not new development at all - it is tax money being used to compete with tax-paying, private owners. $40million of interest-free loans for rehab of existing homes would do 100 times more good than any BMHA project.

We need to get the government out of the poverty business.

I want our neighborhoods preserved. Our neighborhoods represent Buffalo....you can find these matchstick boxes anywhere USA.

I don't see any of those tax paynig private owners stepping up to the plate. And who would come up with the 40 mil in interest free loans? The government you want out of the poverty business? That's who would have to underwrite the loans. If you think private lenders would do this, read the article in today's paper.

At least something positive is going on.

M...excuse me ..but you show little knowledge of the sect 8 voucher system. I'll try to explain as a landlord who has approx 30 of these type of tenancy's. The voucher system allows the recipient to move into quality housing ANYWHERE in the area.. buffalo ,kenmore tonawanda and EVEN amherst. into ANY neighborhood of THEIR choosing. with this concept, they are not collected together like cattle in a barn....as it now appears to be. instead of blacks, asians, hispanic, and caucasian concentrated into one area..they are free to pick their available apt. that is available for rent by ANY landlord on the open market as long as they meet the requirements set forth by the owner and the property meets the HUD REQUIREMENTS. PERSONALLY, i prefer a sect 8 such as b.m.h.a., rental assistance or belmont as they seem to be motivated by the fact they MUST act responsibly or could lose their entitlement. i have had some trouble some tenants, even had 1 removed from the program for lease violations, but as a whole, this concept seems to work well. the property is inspected annuallly to meet H.U.D. requirements and must be brought to code if violations are found. usually have 30 days to comply or lose rental payment. it insures quality housing and helps tremendously in keeping the property in good condition and does not allow the LANDLORD to BLEED the property to only walk away from it at a later date.THIS concept has much more merit than the heavily conentrated "projects that seem to be a breeding ground for our future penitentiary inhabitants. BY the way , this is another b.m.h.a. development..WHAT HAPPENED TO THE JASPER PARRISH " project that was so heavily promoted..STARTING another project without fulfilling the last promised development. just goes to show how inept the b.m.h.a. really is and even more so the current administration who supposedly oversees the b.m.h.a. with its "'APPOINTEES"!!!

WHY the hell is the B.M.H.A. in the development business. we have a private tax paying sector who can accomplish this without our tax dollars. I agree this project is sorely needed here, but to have a politically appointed mgmt. that is only there because of who they are loyal to, and not expertise is a sure mixture for cost overruns, graft and less than quality work. where the hell is the MAYOR on this one. HE is smart enough to see ..I would hope ...that this project has all the ingredients for a catastrophy with the B.M.H.A. in control. PUBLIC HOUSING SHOULD BE IN THE FORM OF A SUBSIDISED VOUCHER SYSTEM thruout the city where private landlords are HELD ACCOUNTABLE WITH ANNUAL INSPECTIONS.if they fail inspection then no rent is paid after a reasonable period of time to bring the property into compliance!! this would insure that quality housing standards are met, no clustering of lo income families into one area or complex, and better integration of our neighborhoods. SELL ALL THE B.M.H.A. PROPERTIES, AND PUT THEM BACK ON THE TAX ROLLS!! Have the b.m.h.a. administer ONLY the sect 8 rental assistance program and be done with it, one less haven for political ass kissers.

Great discussion here.

Pros: This PROJECT will help temporarily stabilize (in addition to some other stuff that has been built nearby in recent years) the nuked urban fabric just east of downtown. This will give the residents of the new project a better lot in life with brand new surroundings.

Most of the plan involves pedestrian-friendly streetscapes. The 3-story mixed use buildings on William are a nice bonus. Alley-loaded garages and the townhomes will add a desner flavor, for once. The cheap-ass construction quality will make it easy to knock down these houses when gentrification eventually creeps its way into this neighborhood.

Cons: I have to agreewith alot of the skeptical commenters on this one. No matter how "urban-friendly" this is dressed up, the project will still be a housing project. Still the same ol' government-sponsored concentration of poverty that has failed time and time again. Don't we get it by now?

I'd like to at least see some effort put forth to try and add some racial balance to this. Ecourage Latinos, Whites and Asians that these new homes are available. Ethnically integrating this project will go a long way in breaking down the age-old perception that everything (in the city) east of downtown (or Main St.) is a big, scary black ghetto.

About the architecture and site plan.... I have a feeling these houses will be the same old "vinyl victorians" (as david of fixbuffalo aptly calls them), only pushed closer together, with some of the garages tucked in the back facing an alley. And yes, it is very likely that the construction quality will be poor, since it will be a contractor riding the gubment cash gravy train. Expect lots of saturated fat in this juicy patronage hookup.

Again, the cheap-ass construction quality will make it easy to knock down these houses when gentrification eventually creeps its way into this neighborhood. But, there is a reason this tidbit first appeard in the PRO column =)

I'll probably babble more on this topic in my new blog in a few days when I return from Chicago.

And who would oversee the voucher system? The government. So we would simply be changing the political asskissers in control. And I am sure that there would soon be a scandal concerning misuse of vouchers, kickbacks from slumlords. etc. Once again, I ask who is this "taxpaying sector" that is going to step up and do this?

To break the cycle of poverty, children and adults alike need role models. They need to see that you can buy that car or own your home through hard work and not public hand out. They need to see that living off of public housing is not living the best life you can have.

I am not against public welfare or assistance, I think it is necessary and important but the way that the US handles is flawed and needs to change.

I do still disagree about the cheap housing argument that it will be easier to demolish when the area starts to gentrify. The problem for me with that argument is that without good quality housing and a nice urban environment; the neighborhood will never gentrify. People move into Downtown because of the quality of housing and lofts. People are moving into Elmwood, the West Side or Allentown because they can get something not found in suburbia, big old beautify homes and commerce within walking distance.

If we want new people to move into this area it has to offer something urban, unique and with quality. Very few people would be willing to give up their school systems or perception of safety for the same type of home they already have. The architecture itself needs to be an incentive. Otherwise we will get another Willert Pratt neighborhood. Which did nothing but concentrate the upper class African Americans into a car oriented elitist community who does everything it can to cut itself off from the neighborhoods around it. Walk down any of those streets, they are well kept, clean and safe feeling, but you will probably never see anyone else on the street with you, just cars going in and out of garages.